I thought instantly of "mein zwei", which can start a conversation all on
its own... :D

On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 6:42 PM, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote:

> Uuuugh, Chris, what's that? A Cher album cover with the writing "Die gab's
> nur einmal" on it. I'm not sure if this the title of the album or EP. But I
> found another, even more beautiful, "Die gab's nur einmal" (she was unique/
> she existed only once):
> http://rateyourmusic.com/release/album/james_last/die_gabs_nur_einmal__as_hans_last_/
>
> Now tell what "Mein Zei" is and what it sounds like!
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 11:59 PM, Chris Jenkins <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I was hearing "Mein Zei", which a quick search of revealed this:
>>
>>
>> http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_e-XkgWgKsc8/TPWZp-qQcQI/AAAAAAAAHtU/cmRoxuAftl4/s1600/Die+Gab%2527s+Nur+Einmal+2.jpg
>>
>> Was ist das, Gabs?
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 5:11 PM, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> I am hearing "Minds Eye", or maybe not.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 5:29 PM, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Loads of stugg comes up on googling images related to the term 'Mind's
>>>> Eye' - not surprisingly a lot of the stuff has an eye in it.  I tend
>>>> to run the 'eye' bit out in my pondering on what a mind's eye might
>>>> be.  Some former science colleagues better at maths than me used to
>>>> try and describe 'visualisation' - how they could manipulate images of
>>>> geometry involving complex shapes and transformations.  I could never
>>>> do this and even have trouble working out what happens to, say, door
>>>> hinges if you turn the door upside down and round-a-bout.  I could
>>>> often 'guess' how a complex system of transformations would end up,
>>>> but could never 'see the process' as some claimed.  This was something
>>>> of a handicap in some stochastic work with molecule shape.
>>>>
>>>> I'm watching an old Oliver film and have no sympathy with Oliver - all
>>>> with the other kids and the brilliantly played evil roles.  I often
>>>> have a lot of difficulty 'seeing' what others are being suckered by in
>>>> propaganda directly and instead a form of critique of the stuff
>>>> arises.  I really dislike, say, Huckleberry Finn being played by the
>>>> rich director's all too clean kid.  I have a cinematic daydreaming
>>>> imagination, but no imaging comes from words when someone says 'table'
>>>> - my sister 'sees' gargoyles if you say the word.
>>>>
>>>> I'm struck there is no 'eye' in mind's eye even though I might as well
>>>> be in a cinema when daydreaming.  Though one might ask if what I see
>>>> 'in cinema' relies on past sight - though again I'm not usually
>>>> 'seeing' recalled events.  I find the artist's attempts at 'mind's
>>>> eye' disappointing.
>>>>
>>>> I'm unsure how I notice so strongly that "economics" (a subject I
>>>> teach with no enthusiasm) is just a 'smell of words' around and
>>>> obvious failure in human cooperation always leading to a very small
>>>> number amassing riches.  It's like a gas keeping he truth-seeker at
>>>> bay.  We are as far from the double-helix in this as the tribe that
>>>> denies paternity through sex, investing it instead in ghosts with the
>>>> 'father role' played by maternal uncles.
>>>>
>>>> It's been my view for many years that argument fails except in very
>>>> special circumstances.  The Greeks knew this because equally powerful
>>>> argument could be adduced for many different views.  They invented a
>>>> kind of "mind's eye" (see Pyhrronism) in which competing arguments
>>>> could be assessed.  This is rather too expert for me.  I suspect that
>>>> what we can't do is strip argument of its propaganda, and suspect
>>>> again this is a matter of fear of violence in challenging 'deeply'
>>>> held views - and further that these views are ill-considered dross.
>>>> One can feel another danger here of the zealot and know-all.  In my
>>>> mind's eye argument comes with smells, emotions, incredulity,
>>>> doubt,probability ... and the coldest, most lying voice of all is the
>>>> disinfected smell of the objective voice.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Reply via email to